"The Myth of Roman Britain?" Topic

Very interesting article here.
See London in the Roman Era.(very good diorama)

Main page
link

Hope you enjoy!.

Amicalement
Armand

Can't quite work out what the article is about. What "myth" are they challenging? They are certainly not saying the Romans didn't conquer or administer Britian. Do people think everyone suddenly started wearing togas after the conquest?

The best example I can think of is British India. The Indians stayed Indian, some learnt English, and there was an overlay of administration and capital works. And barracks and hill stations.

Cheers,
JohnG

From a quick read-through, it's that the Romans didn't change Britain quite as much as was thought – a lot of the Roman "innovations" in Britain were there before the conquest.

I can't quite pick out what the "myth" is supposed to be either. The Romans came, settled, built roads and buildings. Eventually the Roman empire fell. The Anglo-Saxons came, settled. In time the Normans came, settled.

Is the myth that Britain under the Romans was wholly Roman? I have always had the impression hat even under the Romans Britain was something of a backwater province and retained rather more local flavor than Roman.

Well… what about the diorama? (smile).

Amicalement
Armand

Such as it is, very nice. But I was hoping for more pics….

The diorama is very nice. Hopefully we will get to see more pictures. In fact any additional information on Roman and Post-Roman Britain is most welcome.

The diorama was (as far as I still know) at the Imperial War museum UK and I can only find one other pic;

Cheers
paul

I'm fairly sure that that's the one in the Museum of London. If not, there's been a remarkably similar one there since the 1980s; there are some other angles on various bits of it (mainly in black and white, except on the cover) in Gus Milne's book on The Port of Roman London.